2nd Root Server in Europe (fwd)

At 13:08 20/01/97 +0000, Keith N Mitchell wrote:
[snip]	
>	I don't think there are any sacred cows for any of these here -
>	if we adjust the LINX policy to meet requirements of the root NS
>	rather than the other way around, I don't think we break either
>	of 1 or 2. I don't think it breaks 3. either, but this requirement
>	will go away when we have a route server in any case.

If we opt for the root NS to have its own AS then there is no barrier to
people offering identical routing policy for the LINX and the NS. If it
shares the LINX AS then it will be impossible to have different policy for
LINX and the NS. So, if there is a possibility that there will ever be a
requirement to have different routing policy for the NS and the LINX it
would seem wise to give the NS its own AS.

It may be moot in as much as it's probably desireable to achieve 'root
server connectivity quality' for the LINX AS, but the seperate AS for the
root server would preserve some flexibility.